PDA

View Full Version : Gamers Vs Game Quality


SFFWorld.com
Home - Discussion Forums - News - Reviews - Interviews

New reviews, interviews and news

New in the Discussion Forum


Pages : [1] 2

roberth
July 10th, 2008, 04:54 PM
Right, this is a question i feel inclined to bring up, since it seems to be hitting harder recently than ever.

Recently, ive been finding game releases are getting worse and worse. I always anticipate the newest release, as i always have done beforehand, thinking 'This is something that will keep me occupied. I love the wait as i install a game, because it always reminds me that in just a few minutes, my money will be rewarding me with a good solid 10 hours of enjoyment.

And then, i load it up. Im 20 minutes into a game, and thinking 'hmm, what have i bought. Im bored. Already'. Attention span is at an all time low (or so i think at this point). Im no longer a gamer, i can't sit through these games. I find the quality of even most better releases is just lacklustre. Sure, there are a few games that catch my eye. Battle For Middle Earth is still widely played (occasionally, i admit, with a trainer because sometimes you need a fudge off huge army). Audiosurf is still a stroke of genius. Portal is still retaining it humor (if slowly being drained my subsequent replays) and still retaining its enjoyment factor (far from defunkt). Team Fortress 2 is an occasional treat when i have access to it, a computer with the internet, and a GPU from before the middle ages.

And yet, so many games fall far short of my boundaries. I don't believe them to be high, and so once again, i arrive at the conclusion that i am to blame; that games are fine, and i am wrong

Then, i load up Dungeon Keeper. 6 hours later, and 3/4 of the campaign complete, i realised how long id been playing. An example of a game which meets my apparently extremely high standards, despite being only average good according to a general concensus. But if i load up my newer games, once again im bored. My PSP currently has on Grandia, MGS, FFIX, FFVII,FFVIII, Abes Oddessy and Kula World. and i love them.


tl;dr. Are games the issue, or are Gamers. Do you think that the quality standard for games has fallen as the desire for graphics has grown, or am i just past my gaming.



I posted this somewhere else aswell, but i wanted to pose it to the gaming community here

James Carmack
July 10th, 2008, 11:18 PM
While you see a lot of paint-by-numbers titles and countless sequels featuring only minor upgrades, it seems that the bigger issue is that the games coming out recently just aren't clicking with you. Ten years ago, were you interested in the same things as some twenty-somethings? Probably not. And so now what's targeted at the younger demographic is out of sync with your own interests.

Happily, there's a fair market for nostalgia, so you can always turn to that. Then again, maybe you are simply growing out of gaming. People rarely keep the same hobbies and interests their whole life. There's nothing wrong with that.

The trick is that you need to find what appeals to you. God gave us rentals for a reason. If the next big thing just isn't for you, it isn't for you. Plain and simple. If gaming just isn't doing it for you anymore, there's plenty of other options out there. Like cliff diving. ^_^

Fung Koo
July 11th, 2008, 09:35 AM
Bro, I could talk your ear off on this topic. But before I do, are you primarily a console gamer or PC gamer?

If you're a console gamer... sorry, there's not much to be done. Console gaming is generally highly limited in terms of higher complexity games. But, you say you've got a PSP -- have you played Patapon or EchoChrome? Those two are really innovative, and great fun (to my taste). Both have free demos you can download to your PSP from the playstation store.

Also, what's your stance on MMORPG's? Do you have the time or inclination to play them?

roberth
July 11th, 2008, 05:11 PM
MMO's, i enjoy, but i am not willing to pay monthly, my personal opinion is why am i paying for a game every mont...didnt i already do that

I have played patapon, and echocrome. I am still playing both, i enjoy both greatly, since they are both examples of good gameplay, relevant and interesting graphics, and (certainly for echochrome) a frustrating difficulty at some points that draws me back.

Primarily, i am a PC gamer, although as you pointed out i do own (and love) a PSP, as well as a DS, a PS2, a Wii, an N64 (probably my most played)


Also, hold the boat a bit, im not 20 something, im 17 :p. I just feel that, even at my age, i have witnessed a decline in game quality. Perhaps it is as you mentioned, im just growing out of gaming, it certainly has crossed my mind (although i feel sorry for the money pumped in if its true)

James Carmack
July 11th, 2008, 08:13 PM
If you want a decent MMO with no monthly fee, go Guild Wars. I'm not the biggest MMO fan in the world, but I liked it well enough. I actually prefer its art style to that of WoW. Also, GW doesn't have the vicious and brutal Alliance-Horde feud (which makes solo play on PvP servers all but impossible). There are other free MMOs out there. You just have to go hunting a bit.

kater
July 12th, 2008, 05:51 AM
I think there are two factors at work, firstly in any medium a high percentage of what's produced won't be to your taste. Gaming is slightly different to say movies or books because the products seem to get lumped together a bit more and as you become more aware of what is being produced, which anyone with an interest will do, it becomes easy to recognise what will interest you. There are games five years ago I would have bought on day of release that I'll just wait and rent or buy if it's cheap because the excitement of what a game looks like it could be now gives way to something far less appealing.

Secondly I think the cost of creating games, particularly for consoles, has become so prohibitive that you don't have the small teams working on a much wider variety of titles that you did ten years ago. Many have been bought up, and swallowed up in most cases, and now do the latest NFL franchise or some simliar dross that will sell. The cost of failure from a single title is now enough to sink a developer and so the safe option is more and more appealing to companies, throw in a few games making greater-than-Hollywood money and the disparity increases, with expectation overwhelming many titles - Killzone 2 could be a prime example. So the industry now appears to be in a very hit-or-miss cycle, where if a game doesn't do very well it tanks and even if it does 'very well' it may only just scrape a profit because of the cost of creation.

Fruitonica
July 12th, 2008, 08:27 AM
I don't think the quality of games has fallen that greatly, there are still great titles out there if you sort through the dross.

I would say that as you play more and more games your expectations grow, and because games are often very similar, you tend to find them bland. Additionally, your tastes have matured and now don't align exactly with the critical benchmarks, hence your love of the "average" Dragon Quest.

Maybe just take a break from playing games for a while and let things become fresh again. I play rarely but am never disappointed when I do.

Erfael
July 12th, 2008, 09:29 AM
I've said it before and I'll say it again: Graphics are killing the gaming industry. Not only are the art costs for games getting very prohibitive, but the time that companies have to spend on them take so many of their resources that they are left with much less time to make a good game underneath. Years ago, when graphics were much simpler, there was only so much that COULD be done with the visuals, which freed up resources for GAME MECHANICS design. That's not to say that all games were great, but it seems there's definitely a much smaller percentage of really interesting games across all genres that are doing really compelling gameplay. I think it's not a small coincidence that all of my favorite new releases of the last few years have been on the "bad graphics" consoles and handhelds, those systems without the capabilities of pushing really high-end graphics.

I've also noticed it in the MMO world. The only AAA MMOs who have released with a smooth launch and a complete feature list (i.e., not seeing cuts in the final weeks of beta) are ones who didn't push the graphics to the bleeding edge. The big "killer graphics" MMOs (mainly AoC and Vanguard) of the last year or so sliced features and had very rocky starts.

Though I suppose it's no surprise that companies are doing this. People buy graphics. If a game isn't super-shiny the media won't cover it. A few companies have figured it out, though, and maybe others will start to realize it. While I'm not a big WoW fan, you can't deny that setting the game up so that it can be run well on just about any system in the world vastly contributed to it's very fast rise. Stardock is another company that is making games that will run ancient hardware. The amazing thing is, they code really well, and even though their software runs on ancient hardware, it looks nearly as good as the resource-hogs other companies are putting out....go figure.

fluffy bunny
July 12th, 2008, 02:11 PM
Like Kater said you'll find that 95% of any published medium (be it books, comics, TV, film or computer games) is pap and you have to look hard to find the good stuff. As there are fewer computer games than books, you have to look just that little bit harder.

Games are expensive to produce these days. The era of the bedroom programmer passed sometime ago. A lot of companies are only interested in what sells so you will see a lot of sequels/ clones of the latest innovative game. There are a few good games out there, but they tend to be in the shareware market rather than the market approved by the suits.

On the other hand, you're right - you're expectations do increase with every game you play. You want to recreate the sense of wonder of that first time.
The gamers who seem to be the most wowed are those that take a hiatus and return to gaming 4-5years later instead of those involved in the slow evolution of games and new concepts. Multiplayer communities (eg FPS, MMORPGs) also provide more memorable experiences because of the banter that goes on in addition to the game itself. If you don't believe me, go out and buy a decent board game at the price of a computer game and invite a few people around - will give you a different experience than playing on a computer.



People buy graphics
Yes for consoles. Not quite so much for PCs where everyone's machine is different. Looking at the PC charts for the last few yrs, the games that consistently sell for several weeks tend to be those which run on the most machines (eg Civ, Sims, football manager).

roberth
July 12th, 2008, 04:49 PM
If you want a decent MMO with no monthly fee, go Guild Wars. I'm not the biggest MMO fan in the world, but I liked it well enough. I actually prefer its art style to that of WoW. Also, GW doesn't have the vicious and brutal Alliance-Horde feud (which makes solo play on PvP servers all but impossible). There are other free MMOs out there. You just have to go hunting a bit.

A lot of people are pushing guild wars at the moment. The problem is that i dont know any of them

I used to play runescape about 5 years ago. Sure, it was awful, but me and my mates could join up on it, meet up with some more people we didnt know, and do what ever we felt like.

Half the fun for an MMO (for me at least) is playing games with new people, but the other half is playing with people i know, which i cant do

I know what you mean about the art style, i was never a fan of WoW anyway; while im not ignorant enough to say it started the paid MMO obsession, it certainly popularized it